Self-test questions: Trespass to the Person

. Pia bumps into Michael as she is walking through a busy bus station, looking at her mobile phone. Which is the correct statement of the law?

This is an assault as Michael reasonably apprehends that Pia will bump into him.

This is an assault as Pia intends that Michael will reasonably apprehend that she will bump into him.

This is a battery as Pia intentionally applies unlawful force to Michael when she bumps into him.

This is a battery as Pia is reckless as to the application of unlawful force when she bumps into Michael.

This is neither an assault nor a battery as it falls within the generally acceptable standards of conduct.

. Emily is standing near the edge of a swimming pool, she pushes her friend Liam into the shallow end of the pool and he breaks his ankle. Which is the correct statement of the law?

This is a battery as Emily intended to push Liam, but does not need to intend him any harm.

This is a battery as Emily intended to push Liam and it was obvious to a reasonable man that she intended him to suffer harm.

This is not a battery as Emily intended to push Liam, but did not intend him any harm.

This is not a battery as Emily intended to push Liam, but did not intend this specific harm to Liam.

This is not a battery as Emily intended to push Liam and there was no unlawful application of force.

. Felipe is holding a milkshake, he intends to throw it over Tony but his aim is poor and when he throws the drink it lands on Jay instead. Which is the correct statement of the law?

This is a battery as Felipe's intention is irrelevant as long as the reasonable man would foresee the risk of hitting Jay with the milkshake.

This is a battery as Felipe intended to throw the milkshake over Tony and that intention is transferred to Jay.

This is not a battery as Felipe had no intention to throw the milkshake over Jay.

This is not a battery as Felipe intended to throw the milkshake over Tony and the milkshake landing on Jay was an accident.

This is not a battery as Felipe was only reckless about hitting Jay with the milkshake.

. Janie sends a text message to Elana, "I'm coming for you - watch your back!" Elana is scared by the message. Which is the correct statement of the law?

This is an assault because Elana apprehends the direct application of unlawful force.

This is an assault because Janie intends Elana to reasonably apprehend the immediate and direct application of unlawful force, which Elana does.

This is not an assault because Elana's apprehension of immediate and direct application of unlawful force is not reasonable.

This is not an assault because Janie intends Elana to apprehend the application of unlawful force but it is not immediate and direct.

This is not an assault because Janie has no intention to make Elana apprehend the application of unlawful force.

. Bilal walks past a protest in London, Amy is a protestor and shouts at him, "if the police weren't here, we'd beat you to a pulp!" There are police officers stood between Bilal and the protestors. Which is the correct statement of the law?

This is an assault because Bilal reasonably apprehends the immediate and direct application of unlawful force.

This is an assault because Amy intends Bilal to reasonably apprehend the immediate and direct application of unlawful force.

This is not an assault because Bilal's apprehension of immediate and direct application of unlawful force is not reasonable.

This is not an assault because Amy intends Bilal to apprehend the application of unlawful force but it is not immediate and direct.

This is not an assault because Amy has no intention to make Bilal apprehend the application of unlawful force.

. Ari is relaxing at the edge of a car park, when a car driven by Suki comes quickly towards him and runs over his legs. Suki was not paying attention and put the car into reverse instead of a forward gear, so the car travelled in the opposite direction. Which is the correct statement of law?

This is an assault because, by her actions, Suki intended to put Ari in fear of a battery.

This is a battery because Suki intentionally and directly applied force to Ari without his consent.

This is a battery because Suki directly applied force to Ari without his consent.

This is negligence because Suki lacked the intention for it to be a trespass to the person.

This is neither assault, battery nor negligence.

. Mishal is subject to a Court ordered curfew at home between 10pm and 8am. It is enforced by Mishal wearing electronic tags. Any breach of this curfew order would be dealt with by arresting him and bringing him back before the Court. It turns out that due to an administrative error, Mishal has been subjected to the curfew for a day longer than he should have been. Which is the correct statement of law?

Mishal has been falsely imprisoned and would be likely to receive nominal damages.

Mishal has been falsely imprisoned and would be likely to receive substantial damages.

Mishal has not been falsely imprisoned because his movement was not curtailed enough for false imprisonment as he could leave the house during the day.

Mishal has not been falsely imprisoned because he could have physically left the house despite wearing the electronic tag.

Mishal has not been falsely imprisoned because he voluntarily complied with the curfew.

. Piro is trapped in a ground floor room by Queenie. She pushes him into the room and locks the door behind her. Piro notices that the window is open and would be able to climb out without suffering any harm, but chooses not to. Which is the correct statement of law?

Piro has been falsely imprisoned as he was restrained from leaving the room by Queenie.

Piro has been falsely imprisoned as Queenie had restrained his movement by locking the main exit from the room and the open window is irrelevant.

Piro has been falsely imprisoned as Queenie unlawfully and maliciously restrained him by locking him in the room.

Piro has not been falsely imprisoned as the restraint was partial, as there was a reasonable method of leaving the room.

Piro has not been falsely imprisoned as he cannot prove that Queenie unlawfully and maliciously restrained his movements.

. The police sometimes control crowds of people (for example during a protest) by the practice of kettling, in which people are all contained within a certain area and not allowing people to leave, whether or not they were involved. Which case has successfully defended this practice on the basis of necessity?

Adorian v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis [2009]

Ashley v Chief Constable of Sussex Police [2008]

R v Governor of Brockhill Police, ex p Evans (No 2) [2000]

Walker v Metropolitan Police [2014]

Austin v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2009]

. In which case has the Supreme Court considered the tort in Wilkinson v Downton and confirmed that the rule still exists, but should not be expanded.

Murray v Ministry of Defence [1988]

OPO (A Child) v Rhodes [2015]

McDonnell v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015]

Co-operative Group (CWS) Ltd v Pritchard [2011]

Ashley v Chief Constable of Sussex Police [2008]

. What are the elements of the tort in Wilkinson v Downton?

Words or conduct directed towards the claimant for which there is no justification or reasonable excuse and an intention to cause physical harm or severe mental or emotional distress.

Words or conduct directed towards the claimant for which there is no justification or reasonable excuse, an intention to cause physical harm or severe mental or emotional distress and evidence of physical harm or recognised psychiatric illness.

Words or conduct for which there is no justification or reasonable excuse, an intention to cause physical harm or severe mental or emotional distress and evidence of physical harm or recognised psychiatric illness.

Words or conduct directed towards the claimant for which there is no justification or reasonable excuse, an intention to cause physical harm and evidence of physical harm.

Words or conduct directed towards the claimant for which there is no justification or reasonable excuse, an intention to cause severe mental or emotional distress and evidence of recognised psychiatric illness.

. Anna runs up to Olivia at the end of a football match and tackles her to the ground. Olivia does not suffer any injuries but wants to know whether she can bring a claim against Anna. Which is the correct statement the law?

This is a battery as Anna intentionally applies unlawful force to Olivia, but the lack of injuries means that Anna cannot bring a claim.

This is a battery as Anna recklessly applies unlawful force to Olivia, but the lack of injuries means that Anna cannot bring a claim.

This is a battery as Anna intentionally applies unlawful force to Olivia and no defences apply.

This is not a battery as whilst Anna intentionally applies unlawful force to Olivia, Olivia has consented to the battery by consenting to play the game of football.

This is not a battery as whilst Anna intentionally applies unlawful force to Olivia, the lack of injuries means it is not a battery.

. Jason is injured in a road traffic accident and knocked unconscious, whilst he is lying by the side of the road, Katie (a paramedic) arrives at the scene and gives him CPR and breaks one of his ribs in the process. Which is the correct statement of the law.

This is a battery as Katie intentionally applies unlawful force to Jason.

This is a battery as Katie intentionally applies unlawful force to Jason and he does not consent to the treatment.

This is not a battery as Katie did not intentionally apply unlawful force to Jason, she only did so recklessly.

This is not a battery as Katie intentionally applies unlawful force to Jason, but Jason is unable to consent as he is unconscious, but Katie is acting in his best interests.

This is not a battery as Katie intentionally applies unlawful force to Jason but he consents to the battery.

. Rasheed is asleep in a room. Jeyda leaves the room and locks the door, not realising that Rasheed was there. Jeyda realises her mistake and unlocks the door before Rasheed wakes up. Which is the correct statement of the law?

This is not false imprisonment because Rasheed is unaware of his movements being restricted.

This is not false imprisonment because Jeyda did not deliberately lock Rasheed in the room, and Rasheed does not need to be aware of the restriction.

This is false imprisonment because Jeyda does not need to deliberately restrict Rasheed's movements.

This is false imprisonment because Rasheed does not need to be aware that his movements are restricted.

This is false imprisonment because Jeyda does not need to deliberately restrict Rasheed's movements and Rasheed does not need to be aware of the restriction.

. Trespass is actionable per se. What does this mean?

The Claimant can bring an action for trespass only where there are no defences.

The Claimant can bring an action for trespass only where there is proof of special damages.

The Claimant can bring an action for trespass without needing proof of special damages.

The Claimant can bring an action for trespass as long as it is within the limitation period.

The Claimant can bring an action for trespass when they can show direct interference with their person.

Quiz Content